Hello!
Per Brian's excellent suggestion that any proposed rules changes need a month of discussion before draft day, I'm going to put the following suggested changes to the league:
As has been stressed by Doug and Brian, I don't want to see anyone quit because of a proposed rule change, so please be good enough to note now if you strenuously objecty
Rule Change #1: Goalie Points
(Presented by Mike, GM Knights Templar; seconded by Richard, GM Lost Boys)
From the 2008-09 season onwards, the goalie in a team's weekly lineup will be awarded 2 points for every win, with 1 additional point for a shutout (making shutouts worth 3 points), and 1 point for every over-time loss. The statistics source for the FUNHL will inform the league what goalie was assigned the win/loss/SO/OTL.
As statistically demonstrated on the blog: this formula generates a statistical value for goalies putting them at about the same value as forwards, without a need for annual re-evaluation--a situation a majority of GMs have recognized as being ideal. This formula also generates the same approximate value for most goalies as the system used in 2007. Finally, this formula also encourages GMs to always play a viable goalie, since it recognizes wins, instead of goals against, encouraging GMs to draft their backup goalie sensibly.
Rule Change #2 Goalie negative points
(Presented by Richard, GM Lost Boys; seconded by Bob, GM Shadowmen)
(This rule change will be withdrawn if Rule Change #1 passes)
A goalie cannot receive less than 0 points in any game.
---
Discuss!
Richard,
GM Lost Boys
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
Hi Richard,
Re: Proposal #1
Count me, for the reasons cited in previous posts, mildly opposed. I will not take my ball home or even really pout that much as it is a simple way to do the goalie stats (both in one's head and as a statistician) and the results, while biasing some teams' goalies more than others does produce broadly credibly-looking results.
Proposal #2
Much more strongly opposed though again I would not threaten to leave the pool over the change.
At this point I want to make it clear that I will NEVER threaten to leave this pool because I don't get my way. You change the rules however you choose and I will still gleefully club you with them :-)
This change will, however, force my retirement as statskeeper. Regardless of the merits, which I think are minor, it is a real mess to figure out in practice. We do stats on a weekly basis so any "quick" way of doing this - manually resetting any negative result to zero - won't work as you would artificially give the goalie "bonus" points for the next, non-negative pointing game.
To generate the stats properly, for every game where a goalie goes negative the key stats (minutes played and goals against) for that game, and any subsequent negative games, would need to be subtracted from a goalie's NHL total every time those stats are uploaded which, for me, has been daily. A running tally of MIN and GA from games where a goalie loses points would need to be kept. Once a goalie has one negative game, the NHL stats would no longer give an accurate reflection of his value.
Count me opposed, strongly, to this proposal.
Re. Proposal #1: I am thinking on it... not sure, but not counting out. Good arguments have been made on both sides. Regardless of which way we go - Mike and Richard, are you going to implement a strategy of dressing a good goalie this season? ;-)
Re. Proposal #2 - I had intially thought this might be a good way of finding a bit of compromise but hadn't thought it through on the 'stats keeping' front. Doug being the expert on that, I hear what he is saying that you can't track goalie pts through a program and would have to them manually.
Status quo: If we keep the current stats system, I'd much rather overvalue goalies than undervalue them in which case I'd say 4.00 base is better than 3.5 (if we are going to rule out 3.75)
The proposal doesnt really change much and it makes it difficult to play goalies on weak teams. For example the NHL expands and adds a team for this year and Brodeur goes to the new team. He goes from being the best goalie to unplayable instantly.
As for negative numbers i do not understand how this is even an issue? The pool is a yearlong pool so why does it matter if you go negative in a game or two. The only thing this even effects is the challenge cup games and it would alter it by a very small point total.
Will I am impressed by the simplicity of proposal one and most likely would support it; Doug's comments regarding proposal two has me enough concerned, to no longer second that proposal.
Over half the Gms now, I have polled favour the the DC to reduce the SO standard to 3.5.
Until DC meets formally no official announcement can be made.
I will speak to proposal 1 on a different post. But I now formally reject proposal 2 because the points Doug makes.
I, obviously support Proposal 1.
If proposal 1 falls, than I support Proposal 2. But we need a way of generating stats where a goalie does not get negative points.
Yes Chris, at the end of a week, or at the end of the year, any extra negative values a goalie gets on top of negative values from +/- can have a profound affect on the outcome at the end of the season, for the Predator Cup, Omnivore and Herbivore.
I believe we had a year where the Predator Cup was won by the slightest of margins (5 points?). I bet if we were to go back to that season and redue the stats with my system, we may very well have a different outcome because of negative goalie points.
Put me down for 'strenuously object' to all of them.
I, perhaps alone, think we have the right goaltending system (using GAA), the right criteria for determining a change needs to be made (these stats are totally insane!) and the right methodology for adjusting them (we move by .5) up or down, as necessary).
I guess I am just not that into changing things around.
If a choice between saying most goalies are just a minor part of the pool at 3.5 baseline vs. counting 2 pts for a win etc.... then I go with Mike and Richard's proposal.
Brian said;
If a choice between saying most goalies are just a minor part of the pool at 3.5 baseline vs. counting 2 pts for a win etc.... then I go with Mike and Richard's proposal.
Cameron responded: If by 'minor part of the pool' you mean 'as valuable as your top line center' you would be correct.
I'm not sure I've heard a sillier argument yet than the idea that by treating Goalies as equivalent to first line centres(!) we are making them a 'minor' part of the pool.
If you have not already guessed. I am against both proposals.
My biggest objection to Proposal 1 is that it does not cover all situations. Our current system does. If you can come up with a system that covers all scenarios including part games then I am interested. We must remember that we are a week to week pool with an cumulative total. We dress players on weekly basis, play head to head matches and many of us make numerous trades effective the next week. While annual stats may be effective in ranking players our stats are calculated on weekly results
It really does not matter how many games in a week a goalie played.
If he played 2 games, and won 2, that is 4 points minimum.
How would this have any effect on trades? Points are points, as long as we do not allow for negative goalie points.
Until we know for sure how the NHL counts partial games, I hear you barking, it may or may not have a negative affect. But in the grand scheme of things, total points is what matters the most.
Post a Comment